Tuesday, September 28, 2010

The Diplomatic Chess Game of "Peace" Continues...

Diplomatic Tide Turns Against Abbas as He ‘Freezes’ Talks
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu Abbas on Diplomatic Hot Seat

The constantly changing sands in the Middle East have left Abbas roasting under diplomatic heat as he faces blame for “freezing” talks with Israel.

He has frozen discussions with Israel while giving Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu five days to reinstate the building freeze on Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria. If Israel does not comply, Abbas said he will turn to the Arab League to consider the next step.

However, Prime Minister Netanyahu apparently has checked Abbas in what has become a diplomatic game of chess.

U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell hurriedly returns to Israel Tuesday in a frantic attempt to save the Obama administration’s diplomatic “momentum” effort from falling into a ditch that seems to get deeper by the day.

Mitchell and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been hoping to expand a proposed Palestinian Authority-Israeli agreement to a regional peace accord. Mitchell last week visited Lebanon and Syria, which also hosts the headquarters of the Hamas terrorist organization.

The U.S. envoy said that Syria and Lebanon, where Damascus and the Hizbullah terrorist party increasingly influence the country’s affairs, are keys to a regional peace.

American expectations that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu would find a way to overcome PA demands for a building freeze are fizzling out. The administration publicly said it was "disappointed” that Israel did not extend the 10-month moratorium on building, a move that was made under American pressure to satisfy Abbas’ condition for direct talks.

Despite the verbal criticism of Israel by the United States as well as the European Union and the United Nations, Abbas is increasingly viewed by media and analysts as the reason for the failure to sit down with Israel.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has “managed to leave the dead cat [of prospective blame] at the doorstep of both the Obama administration and Mahmoud Abbas,” Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. peace negotiator, told Politico’s Ben Smith.

“Last summer, Israel owned the dead cat,” Smith wrote. “Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made plain their view that Netanyahu’s failure to stop all settlement construction on the West Bank was the obstacle to resumed talks, and after an ill-timed construction announcement, Clinton’s office released details of the unusual 43-minute tongue lashing she delivered to the Israelis.”

“There are people on both sides who have no confidence [in the peace process] and so the name of the game is who gets blamed," pro-PA think tank expert Hussein Ibish told Smith. “[That] is why the Palestinians can say a million times that they’ll walk out — but they can’t.”

Any doubt about support for Israel from Washington was removed on Monday when 87 senators—almost the entire U.S. Senate—signed a letter that effectively praised Prime Minister Netanyahu and blamed Abbes for the latest impasse.
Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Monday, September 27, 2010

He'll Never Give Up Western Wall

*Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is under no obligation to honor any of the commitments that former prime minister Ehud Olmert made to the Palestinians, Netanyahu’s associates said on Saturday night, reiterating statements Netanyahu made throughout his campaign for the premiership a year and a half ago.

Olmert wrote an opinion piece for Friday’s Jerusalem Post in which he called on Netanyahu to offer the Palestinians what he did, which he first revealed to the public in a June 2009 interview with Newsweek’s Kevin Peraino.

“Olmert told me he met with Palestinian [Authority] President Mahmoud Abbas in September 2008 and unfurled a map of Israel and the Palestinian territories,” Peraino wrote. “He says he offered Abbas 93.5 to 93.7 percent of the Palestinian territories, along with a land swap of 5.8% and a safe-passage corridor from Gaza to the West Bank that he says would make up the rest. The Holy Basin of Jerusalem would be under no sovereignty at all and administered by a consortium of Saudis, Jordanians, Israelis, Palestinians and Americans.”

Regarding refugees, Olmert says he rejected the right of return and instead offered, as a “humanitarian gesture,” a small number of returnees, although “smaller than the Palestinians wanted – a very, very limited number.”

In a Tel Aviv speech sponsored by the Geneva Initiative last Sunday, Olmert revealed that the “very, very limited number of refugees” Israel was willing to accept was 20,000. He also claimed that the United States had offered to accept 100,000.

When top Bush administration officials denied that an offer of such a large number could have been made, sources close to Olmert hinted that it came from either George W. Bush himself or his secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. Olmert did not reveal who made the offer in the article.

“Olmert said all along that the terms of his negotiations were that there would be no deal on anything until there was a deal on everything, so not only would Netanyahu not have to accept anything Olmert offered, but even Olmert wouldn’t,” a Netanyahu associate said.

“What Olmert told the Post has no impact on us.”

MKs close to Netanyahu went further and specifically ruled out Netanyahu accepting a single Palestinian refugee or giving the Palestinians or any foreign entity control over Jerusalem’s Holy Basin, singling out the Temple Mount and Western Wall.

When asked whether they thought they could make peace without paying the price that Olmert was willing to pay, Netanyahu’s confidants would only say that this was what the current negotiations were intended to determine.

“There is no situation in which Netanyahu or any Likud leader could offer the Palestinians what Olmert offered, especially regarding Jerusalem,” said Likud faction chairman Ze’ev Elkin, who is close to Netanyahu. “I don’t think any Likud MK would vote for it, and the public would be overwhelmingly against it as well.”

Likud hawk MK Danny Danon said the problem was not with Netanyahu but with the president of the United States, Barack Obama.

“I don’t believe Netanyahu would have considered Olmert’s conditions but there is no doubt that Obama sees them as obligatory,” Danon said. “They don’t understand that we had an election that changed the reality in Israel.”

Meanwhile, Labor officials denied a report in Friday’s Yediot Aharonot that quoted an international businessman who tried to mediate a deal for Barak to join Kadima following 2006’s Second Lebanon War, when he was out of the Knesset.

The report said that Barak offered to break up the Labor faction and take a third of it with him in return for the Defense portfolio.

“Olmert is once again rewriting history and distorting reality in order to distract the public from the envelopes of bribes he received,” a Labor spokesman said. “The initiatives and strange ideas portrayed in the newspaper have come from Olmert’s wild imagination.

“Any offers made to Barak were politely declined.”

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Friday, September 24, 2010

Judea and Samaria Prepare to Build

by Maayana Miskin Judea, Samaria Prepare to Build

Jews in Judea and Samaria are preparing for the end of the construction freeze imposed on them for the past 10 months this Sunday night. Local officials have announced that they will open their offices on Sunday at midnight to begin signing building permits the minute the freeze ends.

Deputy head of the Binyamin Regional Council Moti Yogev spoke to Arutz Sheva's Hebrew-language news service and said construction would resume “as soon as possible.” Yogev criticized the building freeze as immoral, but said local authorities in Judea and Samaria would abide by the freeze until Sunday out of respect for the rule of law.

When the freeze ends, “we won't seek publicity, we'll just work on building,” he continued. “What we want is to build as much as possible,” he explained.

Jewish renewal in Israel is unstoppable, he continued. “We are all witnesses to the return of the people of Israel to its land. Even if some want to get in our way – this process cannot be stopped. It's best to join in and help. Judea and Samaria will only grow stronger, and those who make trouble only create challenges to make us stronger over the course of the years,” he stated.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has faced strong pressure from the United States to continue the construction freeze. U.S. President Barack Obama addressed the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday and told the world that America wants a continued building freeze for Judea and Samaria Jews – a statement that angered many Israelis, who accused Obama of disrespect for democracy and the will of the Israeli people.

Despite the pressure, Netanyahu has repeatedly stated that building will resume as scheduled. Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas backed down this week from threats to quit negotiating with Israel if construction is allowed.
Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

1947-48 Britian's Anti-Semitism

Greed always fuels disgusting acts such as this...and I know America isn't blameless today... Mid

Britain bombed ships that were to transport Jews after Holocaust

By Brett Michael Dykes
The British government used bombs and covert tactics to try to thwart the settlement of Palestine by post-World War II Jewish refugees, according to a new book by Keith Jeffery, titled "MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-1949." The British government has independently verified Jeffery's revelation. Jeffery, a historian from Northern Ireland, notes that his book was "published with the permission of the Secret Intelligence Service and the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office."
According to Jeffery, the British undertook the effort -- dubbed, oddly enough, Operation Embarrass -- in order to curry favor with oil-rich Arab states upset over the Jewish migration to the Middle East. The Daily Beast's Andrew Roberts broke the news of the book's disclosures.
MI6, Britain's secret intelligence service, planted explosives to disable ships before they could transport Jewish men, women and children from Europe to Palestine. Britain controlled Palestine at the time and, partly due to pressure from wartime Arab allies, adopted a policy of strictly limiting Jewish migration to British-controlled lands in the region. In May 1948, the British left and Israel declared independence.
In addition to the direct physical sabotage, Roberts notes, the British launched a disinformation and propaganda campaign to impede the settlement.
Launched on Feb. 14, 1947, Operation Embarrass operated with a budget equivalent to $47,000 -- not an insignificant amount at the time. It began by dispatching a team of agents to France. The spies -- traveling under the guise of yachtsmen -- planted bombs on five ships docked in Italian ports in the summer of 1947 and early 1948. One ship was destroyed, two damaged; the explosives were discovered on the other two ships before they were detonated. British authorities were able to escape responsibility because the Italian investigators ruled out the idea of British-sponsored attacks on the ships. Instead, the Italians believed the likely culprits were Arabs using British-made explosives.
According to Jeffery, "the primary consideration" of the mission was "that no proof could ever be established between positive action against this traffic and His Majesty's Government." In the event they were caught, British agents were under orders to claim that they'd been recruited in New York by anti-communist businessmen working "mainly in the oil and aircraft industries." Or as the Daily Beast's Roberts puts it, they were to "lay the blame on rich, right-wing, unnamed Americans."
At the time, the British controlled much of the land in Palestine, and the British government technically viewed the Jewish settlers to the region as illegal immigrants. Still, before these latest revelations, no one would have suspected that the British launched deliberate attacks on Jewish settlers.
All of which compounds the irony of the MI6 putting forward an attempt to undermine large-scale Jewish settlement in the region under the name Operation Embarrass. As the Daily Beast's Roberts writes, "The country that ought to be embarrassed by Operation Embarrass — indeed shamed — is Great Britain, which used explosives to try to stop truly humanitarian flotillas after the Holocaust, but now condemns embattled Israel for halting entirely politically inspired flotillas to Gaza despite her rights of legitimate self-defense."
(Photo: AP)

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Sunday, September 19, 2010

PA: Give Us A State Or It's War

by Maayana Miskin
Published: 09/19/10

Senior Palestinian Authority negotiator Nabil Shaath has announced that the PA will never accept Israel as a Jewish state. In addition, he threatened war if the PA fails to obtain its demands through negotiations, saying, “A Palestinian state will arise, either through negotiations or through armed resistance.”

The Arab League voted last week to support PA Chairman Abbas' refusal to recognize Israel as Jewish.

Shaath said that recognizing Israel as Jewish state would undermine the PA's demand for the “right of return,” which would grant Israeli citizenship to the millions of descendants of Arab who fled Israel during its War of Independence.

He also claimed that accepting a Jewish state “will directly threaten the Muslim and Christian Palestinians in Israel.”

The PA has demanded that no Jewish residents remain in the territory it claims as the location of a future Arab state, including any Israelis in Judea and Samaria who would be willing to become PA citizens. Arab leaders in the PA and elsewhere have insisted that Israel cease all construction for Judea and Samaria Jews in order for negotiations to proceed.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak backed the PA view in an interview with Channel 1 broadcast Saturday night. “I say to Israeli citizens, including Jews, Muslims and others, that there is no such thing as a state in which all the citizens are Jews,” he said.

While the Arab League and Mubarak argued against labeling a state “Jewish,” many Arab League nations – among them Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Libya – are officially Muslim countries. In Syria the president is required by law to be a Muslim, and the same is true for the Prime Minister of Lebanon.

Story source here

This tiresome rhetoric from the PA is sounding a lot like a broken record. Same words...different day. The PA will not recognize Israel, so one day they will get the war they have been threatening. War is sure to break out very soon. Sadly for the PA, it will not be a pretty sight, for the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is in control...and He wins! Pray for Israel, and that many lost souls might come to know the Lord in a personal way!


Yom Kippur Ends...Sukkah Building Begins

Kippur Ends, Time for SukkahsTime out from the ongoing rhetoric of peace talks...time to build sukkahs (booths) for The Feast of Tabernacles... Mid

by Hillel Fendel

Many hundreds of thousands of Jews spent part or all of the day in synagogues today - and for many of them, the dramatic fast-ending shofar blast was the signal for the fulfillment of additional commandments: The evening Maariv prayer, the Sanctification of the Moon blessing, the Havdalah blessings marking the end of the Sabbath, and a start to building Sukkahs; the holiday of Sukkot begins four nights from now.

Some 180 Hesder yeshivot students spent Yom Kippur in army bases from Mt. Hermon to Eilat, leading the prayers for those soldiers designated to spend the holiday there. It will be recalled that 37 years ago, the Yom Kippur calm in IDF army bases and elsewhere was decimated when the Syrians and Egyptians surprise-attacked Israel in what became the Yom Kippur War.

Many secular-friendly Yom Kippur services were held around the country, courtesy of the Tzohar and Ayelet HaShachar organizations.

Religious Zionist yeshiva students, including a group from the, Merkaz Harav Kook Yeshiva in Jerusalem who went to Kibbutz Degania, and tens of religious Zionist families,  left their own synagogues and went to non religious kibbutzim to lead Yom Kippur services. The last few years have seen synagogues being built on many secular kibbutzim, which gave rise to the request for groups who could conduct High Holiday services.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Friday, September 17, 2010

The War this Yom Kippur

Friday 17 September 2010 by Stan Goodenough (Jerusalem) 
They are ganging up on Israel, and are going to paint Prime Minister Netanyahu the lone culprit when the “peace” process falls. To withstand the American-European-Arab alliance, the Israeli will need all the strengthening he can get in the week ahead. That means Christian support and prayer. Apart from among Israel’s Jews, he’s not going to find help anywhere else.
We cannot imagine the pressure he is under at this moment to not resume building in Samaria and Judea when the “settlement freeze” expires September 26. The unrelenting demand on him has intensified in the hours leading up to Yom Kippur (which begins Friday afternoon Israel time). He will gain a little respite during this Day of Atonement, but the pressure will be back in full force the moment the fast is past.
On Thursday, they addressed Netanyahu with one voice:
Visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “appealed” to the Israeli leader to continue the freeze, even just for a “limited time,” saying it would be “extremely useful” if he would agree.
She stressed President Barack Obama believed “doing something about the moratorium” would be “an important decision by Israel [and] in the interest of the negotiations.”
The European Union issued a declaration adopted by foreign ministers who demanded the freeze continue and “recall[ed] that settlements are illegal under international law.”
In excerpts published Thursday evening from an interview with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – filmed by Israel’s Channel One television station and scheduled to be broadcast to the nation Saturday evening directly after Yom Kipper – the Egyptian ruler said he had “told” Netanyahu “to extend the freeze for at least three or four months [to] help achieve satisfactory results.”
When, according to Mubarak, the prime minister said he could not do so due to resistance within his government, the Egyptian said he “told Netanyahu to forget about all those who are hesitant and skeptical and to continue with the settlement freeze for a few more months at least.”
Mubarak said he had warned Netanyahu that extending the freeze was a small price to pay compared with the repercussions of failing to do so.
All this the Israeli public will hear Saturday night.
Taking full advantage of this unified front against his enemy, PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas told reporters Thursday that failing to extend the moratorium jeopardized the peace process.
And Arab League president Amr Moussa darkly told Reuters there was “no use continuing negotiations if settlement construction does not stop.”
It is easy to criticize Netanyahu’s perceived weaknesses, to pontificate, that if he can’t stand the heat he should never have entered the kitchen.
While there are times when such criticism may be helpful, I don’t believe this is one of them. It will only add to the already wall-to-wall weight under which no secular leader of a tiny little country like Israel can stand.
As Christians who believe that the territory in question – which the international community is trying everything in its power to wrest from Israel’s control – is the Jewish people’s God-given land;
As Christians who recognize that the establishment of a Palestinian state on that land will immeasurably heighten the existential threat to Israel;
As Christians who see vividly that the only “solution” contained in this land-for-peace process is the solution to the Muslim world’s problem with the Jews;
As Christians who understand that Israel’s government and prime minister are looking for human answers to what is, in reality, a spiritual question;
And as Christians who believe that Israel’s Commander in Chief outranks America’s commander in chief and has already determined to thwart Obama’s plan and the plan of the nations:
Today, as the Jews go into their synagogues and houses and chambers and come to the end of their Days of Awe, of soul searching and repentance; and as Prime Minister Netanyahu himself looks perhaps inwards or upwards for the wherewithal to withstand the assault that will resume tomorrow night – let us gather around Israel and around Bibi in prayer, and also in fasting.
Let us enter the Throne Room, and as the scepter is extended, let us petition Almighty God – the God of Israel – to confound the plans of the Obama administration, of the European Union, of the United Nations, of the Arab League, and of every member of the anti-Israel coalition.
Let us ask Him to brace up Israel’s leadership – those in the Knesset who want to end the “freeze” – and to give, especially the prime minister, heavenly assistance; supernatural inspiration and strategy, and a strength above and beyond his natural ability to withstand all that is brought to bear against him.
Then let us act.
Let us get onto our representatives TODAY and demand that they call for an end to the shameful and unjust coercion of the Israeli government; let them know that we deplore this anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian position that has now been adopted so openly by the political leadership in our countries – especially if we are American or European. Write to the editors of your local media, decrying the bullying tactics that are being used against Israel. And when they “report” in the usual biased way – joining in the finger pointing at Netanyahu – condemn the press prejudice and insist that they stick to the facts and at least give BOTH sides a fair hearing.
Here in Israel we are gearing up for action too. On September 26 – D-Day for ending the freeze – hundreds of visiting Christians from all over the world will be gathering in the “settlement” of Ariel, capital of Samaria, to affirm the right of the Jewish people – formed into a nation in the very place which the world wants them to surrender – to build and to grow and to give birth and to live and to continue to thrive in the  land given exclusively by God to the descendants of Jacob forever.
For more on this event, watch this space. If you are, or will be, in Israel this coming week, email jerusalemwatchman@gmail.com for details.
Meanwhile – let us not be idle. We have a great deal to do.
And may the Lord hear the prayers of His people.

Jerusalem Newswire is a service of the Jerusalem-based INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN ZIONIST CENTER, providing regular coverage and commentary on events in and relating to Israel.
We encourage you to forward Jerusalem Newswire reports and editorials to friends and fellow believers, that they too may benefit from this free service offering a unique, biblically-based source of news and information direct from the heart of the Jewish state. Also available by email: Praying the Word for Israel - containing daily headlines and relevant passages of Scripture to guide our prayers. Email editor@jnewswire.com.
For more news, commentary and analyis, visit Jerusalem Newswire.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

The Truth About "Palestine" Many Won't Hear

I can't emphasize this strong enough or often enough!! Mid
by Steven Simpson
The term "Palestine" has conjured up many images and meanings throughout the centuries. In the Christian West, the term was synonymous for the "Promised Land," or the "Holy Land," that is, the Land of the Jews. Throughout the centuries, the terms "Palestine" and "Palestinian" were analogous to the terms "Israel" and "Jew." This is quite evident from reading books, articles, newspapers, and encyclopedias. "Palestinian" was used to identify Jews living in the Holy Land as opposed to Jews living elsewhere, such as in Babylonia, Persia, Greece, Rome, or elsewhere. In fact, within Judaism there is even a Talmud (ancient composition of commentary on the Bible) that is called by historians the "Palestinian Talmud," as opposed to the "Babylonian Talmud."
Nevertheless, within the last forty to fifty years, a perverse and vicious transmogrification of the term "Palestine" has taken root among anti-Jews and anti-Israel haters around the globe, most notably in the Arab/Muslim world, and in the increasingly "dhimmified" European world. A name in Arabic — "Filastin" — that has no historical connotations or etymological meaning for Arabs and other Muslims — has now taken on the properties of a wholesale myth that could fill volumes of vitriolic and venomous propaganda. Indeed, the whole distortion and myth of an Arab "Palestine" has become a virtual religion unto itself.
How did this myth of a non-existent people and non-existent land of "Filastin" ever come to be? The answer lies in the tragic history of the Roman-Jewish "encounter" during the 1st and 2nd centuries, when Israel (then called Judea) was occupied by the Roman Empire.
The Jews bitterly resented being ruled by the pagan Romans, and for over a century fought to regain their independence. Twice during Roman rule, an independent Kingdom of Judea existed. First, under Herod the Great (while Augustus was emperor), and then under Herod's grandson, Herod Agrippa, (while Claudius was emperor). Regardless, all ended in disaster when the Jews rose in revolt in 66 A.D., and fought a four year war with Rome that resulted — according to the eyewitness historian Josephus — with close to a million Jewish deaths, and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Holy Temple.
Yet Judea, while conquered, remained a restive province in the Roman Empire. This changed dramatically and drastically in 132 A.D. when a Jewish warrior by the name of Simeon bar Kokhba raised another revolt against Rome. The war lasted for three years and was so intense, that the Emperor Hadrian had to recall his greatest general, Julius Severus from Britain. It took close to a dozen Roman legions to put down the revolt, but when it was finished, so was Judea. Hadrian had had enough of the Jews and their revolts and decided to rename Judea "Syria Palestina." The name "Palestina" was chosen after the Philistines — ancient enemies of the Israelites. It was nothing more than pouring salt into the wounds of the already defeated Jews. Jerusalem's name was not spared either and was renamed "Aelia Capitolina." And so it appeared that the "Jewish Question" of the 1st and 2nd centuries had been "solved." However, Jews continued to remain as a majority in their conquered land.
The situation remained static until the Arabs marched out of the Arabian desert conquering every country in sight for Allah and Muhammad. In 635 A.D., the Arabs conquered the Holy Land from Byzantium. However, it appears that the Muslims had no real interest in the land. In fact, when they entered Jerusalem, they apparently did not realize where they were, as they first called the city "Iliyas," nothing more than an Arabicized form of the Latin "Aelia" (which, as previously stated, was substituted for the name of Jerusalem). In an ironic twist of fate, it was a Jew who had converted to Islam that pointed out to the Caliph Omar where he and his occupation army were now standing; namely, Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. It was then that the Arabs decided to call the city "Al Quds" and "Beit al Muqdas." Once again, these are nothing but Arabicized terms from the original Hebrew: "Ha-Qodesh" and "Beit ha-Miqdash" which respectively mean "the Holy (City)" and "the Holy House" (i.e., "Holy Temple").
The Arab-Muslims now called the land "Jund Filastin" (Province of Palestine) — a direct borrowing from the Greco-Roman term. But because Arabic has no "p" sound in it language, "Palestina" became "Filastin." Indeed, every name of every so-called "Arab village" in Israel is nothing more than an Arabic perversion of the original Hebrew, Greek or Latin names for a city. (To name just two: "Habrun" — from the Hebrew "Hevron", and "Nablus" — Nea Polis, ("New City") built on the ruins of biblical Shechem.) The Arab Muslim disinterest in the land was so great that with the exception of the city of Ramleh (perhaps built on the Jewish ruins of the city Ramathaim Zophim, according to some archaeologists) no other city was ever built by the Arabs or the other Muslim conquerors. Even more ironic, it was Ramleh that became the provincial capital of "Filastin." Jerusalem played absolutely no significance with the major exception of the building of Masjid Al-Aqsa (the Mosque of Al Aqsa) and Qubbat as-Sahra (the Dome of the Rock) over the ruins of the Jewish Temple. And the reason for building these structures was to show the superiority of Islam over Judaism, and to be in "competition" with the Christian Holy Sepulchre which had been built nearby, centuries earlier.
NOTHING CHANGED OVER THE CENTURIES as the denuded land of "Palestine" went from one conqueror to another. Finally, in 1917, Britain wrested the land from the Ottomans and after promising the Jews a homeland in their ancestral country, the League of Nations awarded a Mandate to the British which extended over both the western and eastern banks of the Jordan River. It was at this point that the term "Palestine" was revived as a quasi-political entity ruled by a British governor.
While the Jews began to call their newspapers, charities, and organizations such names as the Palestine Post and the "United Palestine Appeal," the Arabs eschewed the term as being "Jewish" and "Zionist." For them, they were Muslims first, and "Southern Syrians" second. Indeed, many an Arab politician and historian denied that there was ever a country called "Palestine." To name the amount of Arab political figures and historians who stated this would require an article all by itself. Suffice to say that Arabs such as the late Hashemite monarch Hussein "Chairman" Arafat, and noted Arab historian Philip K. Hitti, have all candidly admitted that no such country as "Palestine" ever existed. In fact, the latter, while appearing in front of a January 11, 1946 Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in Washington, D.C. stated "[T]here is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not." The late King Hussein, who knew about artificial entities (i.e., Transjordan — now "Jordan") said that "[T]he truth is that Jordan is Palestine, and Palestine is Jordan." He said this on more than one occasion in the 1970s and as late as December 26, 1981 in an interview with the Paris based Arabic newspaper An-Nahar Al Arabi ("The Arabic Daily"). Many other Hashemites (past and present) have made similar statements. Indeed, without the help of Churchill and Britain, there would never have been a "Hashemite entity" on the East Bank of the Jordan created in 1922 and carved out of the original "Palestine Mandate" for the Jewish National Home. And in one of the most candid admissions ever made, Zuhair Muhsin, little known leader of the PLO splinter gang known as "Al Sa'iqa" (The Storm) and backed by Syria, said in a March 31, 1977 interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw:
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.
Muhsin was eventually assassinated by Israel in 1979.
And of course, there was "Chairman" Arafat who in a 1974 interview with The New Republic stated: "What you call Jordan is actually Palestine."
Regardless, until the founding of the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964, "Palestine" and "Palestinian" had no meaning for the Arabs. As an aside, the fact that the PLO was created in 1964 by the League of Arab States and not after the June "Six Day War" of 1967, is telling enough that Ahmad Shuqayri (original founder of the PLO), and his successor Yasser Arafat, were looking for the total extermination of Israel, while Jordan already had the "occupied territories" of the "West Bank," and Egypt had the "Gaza Strip." For them and for the PLO (or PA of today), "Palestine" is just a part of the "Arab Muslim national homeland" that has to be liberated from the "infidel" Jews. As late as 1967, even the UN did not refer to the term "Palestinians" merely calling them "refugees." (Resolution 242 of November 22, 1967.) However, as the late 1960s turned into the 1970s, the historical terminology of "Palestine" began to be turned upside down, and hijacked by the Arabs. It now became terms synonymous with Arabs, but in reality was only a weapon in the fight to extirpate Israel from the world.
The facts are undeniable. "Palestine" has no meaning in Greek, Latin, Arabic, or English. It is a general fact that a people give their name to a country, not vice-versa. Thus, the Arabs call their homeland, "Jazirat al-Arab" or "Island of the Arabians." The Jews call their land Israel because they were called Israelites; Israel in Hebrew meaning "to strive with God." Similarly, it was called Judah or Judea after the tribe of Judah (meaning "praise" in Hebrew). Ironically, there is only one language in which the term "Palestine" has a meaning, and that language is Hebrew. The name translated as "Philistia" in the Holy Bible comes from the Hebrew "Peleshet" which means nothing more than "land of the Philistines." Contrary to Arab propaganda, the Philistines were a non-Semitic, Indo-European people who migrated to what is now Gaza. Historians believe that these "sea peoples" originated in the Aegean area of what is now Crete.
In conclusion, one can only imagine if Hadrian had never changed the name of Israel from Judea to Palestina. We might very well have seen a "Judea Liberation Organization" instead of a "Palestine Liberation Organization" and we might very well be hearing the mantra of the "inalienable rights of the Judean Arab people." At the same time, if Hadrian had changed the name of Judea to Mars, we would be hearing of the "Martian Arab people." Of course, this sounds absurd, but not any more absurd than the fictitious mythical land and people of "Palestine."
Israel would be well advised to learn from the cruel fates of history which has a way of repeating itself. Judea did not exist alongside "Palestina" after Hadrian's destruction in the 2nd century. Similarly today, in the 21st century, it is impossible for Israel to exist "side by side in peace" with a "Palestine" that seeks to replicate and complete Hadrian's war against the Jews. One state or the other can exist, but never both.
Israel is a historical reality. Arab "Palestine" is an artificial invention.
Inevitably, a "two state solution" will lead to nothing less than a final solution for the state of Israel, and perhaps for the Jews of the world. It is time for Israel to take a courageous stand and face the painful facts of reality — and history.

This article appeared July 13, 2010 in Front Page Magazine

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

The Truth About Israel page-new post

Check out the post on our The Truth About Israel  page! Shalu Shalom Yerushalayim!
Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

It IS Israel's Fault!

Israel IS to blame

Posted on Tuesday 14 September 2010 by Stan Goodenough

This is the second part ... read carefully... mid

The much-trumpeted bi-lateral talks between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) are tottering on the knife-edge of collapse.
As inevitably they must, they will fail.
In anticipation, the Obama administration is preparing to lay the blame at Israel’s door.
What they are already saying, is that the talks disintegrated because Israel insisted on building “Jewish settlements” on “occupied Arab lands.”
For the first time I find myself partially in agreement with Washington.
The issue of construction and growth of communities for Jews in Samaria and Judea HAS repeatedly fouled up the peace process and is, inevitably, leading to its demise.
But it is not the BUILDING of these homes and offices, synagogues, industrial parks and shopping malls (aka “Jewish settlements”) that is the problem – as the world led by Washington maintains.
Israel’s fall down is the fact that this building has been, and is being, done on land successive governments in Jerusalem have increasingly admitted does not belong to the Jews!
What Israel has de facto told the world is: “This land is not ours, but we are going to build on it anyway. … We’ve stolen this land and we’re keeping it, and we’re using it, and we don’t care what anyone says.”
But wait, you protest. When has Israel said anything so outrageous?
And the answer is: Every time Israeli officials and journalists and ordinary citizens refer to these areas as “occupied territories” or “the West Bank.”
There was a time when, for example, even today’s extreme left-wing politicians called the land by its historically accurate name of Samaria and Judea.
It was known as Samaria and Judea in biblical days, and down through post biblical history, even in such publications as the Encyclopedia Britannica in the late 19th century. Google for maps of ancient Palestine and you will find, for example, one by Alexander G Findlay, drawn in 1849, as stored digitally by the University of Texas at Austin. The names Samaria and Judea stand boldly out on the page.
When I moved to Israel in 1991 The Jerusalem Post, Israel’s then right-wing daily newspaper, identified these lands as Samaria and Judea.
Back then, or shortly before, the establishment of a Palestinian state ANYWHERE was seen by so many people as a mortal danger to Israel that should never be allowed.
Believe it or not, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin once said:
“Palestine will rise on the ruins of the State of Israel. … A Palestinian state will be a time bomb which will draw the Arab world into war.”
President Shimon Peres once said:
“The Arabs foster the separate Palestinian nationalism, and the myth of ‘restoring the rights of the Palestinian nation’ within the territory of the State of Israel and in its stead, in order to destroy Israeli nationalism. The Palestinian national demand is designed to abrogate the existence of the State of Israel and not to coexist with it peacefully.”
And Netanyahu is on record as saying, many times more than once, that a Palestinian state must NEVER be established.
How far they all have fallen.
What about the Arab side? It hasn’t budged an inch. For more than 62 years the Arabs have maintained that this land is theirs. They insist it is all (including so-called Israel-proper) their land. And they vow not to surrender any of it.
The world agrees. It is hard (impossible?) to find one world leader or a single mainstream journalist – electronic or print – who will eschew calling Samaria and Judea the occupied Arab West Bank.
But on this, most crucial of the Middle East battlefield, Israel has retreated, given ground to the enemy.
Take this opening paragraph from today’s The Jerusalem Post website:
As the second round of Israeli-Palestinians peace talks wrapped up in Sharm e-Sheikh on Tuesday, US Mideast envoy George Mitchell offered no evidence of progress on the issue of West Bank settlements.
“West Bank settlements” instead of “Jewish communities in Samaria and Judea.”
It’s as if almost all Israelis have resigned themselves to calling their land “not our land.”
This course has been followed for so long now. And truly, in the world of 21st century international politics, it is hard, some would say impossible, to reverse.
But Israel, your leaders will have to reverse.
They will have to confess; they will have to repent; and they will have to reverse.
It will cost you blood. First of all, it will cost political blood. But then it will cost red, human blood – the life of your people. But you have to regroup and you have to reform and you have to turn around and charge back onto that battle field, waving the Star of David, trumpeting the charge with your shofars, firing fiercely and determined to never again retreat; never again give ground to the enemy; never again take risks for peace that are in fact risks with your existence.
Whose is the land? This is the battle: You have to announce, declare, proclaim, and assert: “Samaria and Judea is our land. It is Jewish land. It is the cradle of our nationhood, the home and the burial place of our founding fathers, the geographical furnace in which our nation was formed and forged. Our roots are irremovably deep in this land.”
And you have to vow: “We will build on this land; we will develop it; we will live in it, we will grow in it, and we will die in it. We will never give one inch of it away.”
The Jewish people are presently in the middle of the 10 Days of Awe that began on Rosh Hashana (the Jewish New Year) last week and will end with the start of Yom Kippur this coming Saturday.
Every night, they gather in thousands of synagogues across the country to say slichot – sorry – for the sins of the past year.
This is the perfect time for Prime Minister Netanyahu needs to say “slicha” – sorry – to his nation.
He should confess to his people – loudly enough for Washington, the UN, the EU, the Arab states and all the world to hear:
“We, Israel’s governments, ARE TO BLAME for the failure of the land-for-peace process. We have broadcast a mixed message. In our desperate desire to secure peace for our nation we have compromised on what we all now to be true. But no more.”
Yes, Israel’s government should acknowledge that it has failed its people, and ask the nation’s forgiveness. Then it should take the required, resolute step, stopping the peace process dead, and refusing to participate any further in this farce.
There is fault to be found with many of Israel’s leaders – including Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu. Every one of these men has contributed to the collapse of a diplomatic process into which world leaders and the international media poured such massive amounts of political and pecuniary capital.
It goes without saying that if these Israelis are to blame – then the other parties – the PLO and its constituents; the Arab League; the Quartet – all have a great deal more to answer for. And they will. But for now I am not dealing with them.
The elected leaders of the State of Israel cannot escape the responsibility they bear. From the point of view of the Jewish people, and in the context of the millennia of Jewish history, their failing is by far the most serious of all.
Unless this is seen, and unless the current government moves immediately to turn the situation around, the danger hanging over Israel could engulf this little land.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Clinton Blames Israel If Talks Fail...

Clinton: Israel to blame if talks collapse

Posted on Tuesday 14 September 2010 by Stan Goodenough

It suited the twisted political purposes of Israel’s extreme leftist newspaper, Ha’aretz, to headline its top story Tuesday morning with the warning voiced by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the night before.
Boarding her flight to the Middle East to chair the much-anticipated renewal of negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the American pointed her perfectly manicured index finger at the camera and stated, according to the paper:
“Israel must extend the settlement freeze for the peace talks to succeed.”
Her blatancy should not have shocked Israelis.
She had upped the stakes two days earlier with the scaremongering assertion that “there may not ever be another chance” for the two sides to make peace.
Clinton is on the very same page as her boss in the White House who – while insisting on the impartiality of his brokerage – Friday clarified (for the few who were still unsure) which sides’ position he supported more.
“It makes sense,” he told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for you “to extend the moratorium.”
Whether it made sense for the Palestinian Arabs to agree to Netanyahu’s demand that they recognize Israel as a Jewish state, however, he did not say.
These two issues loomed as major stumbling blocks long before the parties booked their flights for the Washington photo opportunity that was held 10 days ago.
For those who may have forgotten, Netanyahu was pressured into agreeing to a moratorium on construction in Judea and Samaria 10 months ago as a “goodwill gesture” to help create an atmosphere conducive to restarting the long stalled negotiations.
No quid pro quo was forthcoming from the “Palestinian” side; not so much as a “we’ll consider it” when informed of Israel’s insistence that the Arab side recognize it specifically as a JEWISH state.
Netanyahu reiterated this expectation at the weekly cabinet meeting on September 12, but, again, has received no backing from Washington.
Instead we have Clinton’s unwavering focus on the Arabs’ demand – that Netanyahu continue to not build homes and businesses for Israelis in Samaria and Judea.
The end game is clear – and the Israeli leader must have known this, even as he sat down with Clinton and Abbas in Sharm e-Sheikh.
True to Obama’s word, when the US saw an obstacle in the way it singled out one party for extra pressure, and set it up for blame.
Clinton will naturally not accuse the Palestinian Arabs – who have taken not one single step backwards, who have taken not one risk for peace – in all the years since Madrid and Oslo.
She’ll not come down on Mahmoud Abbas’ head for saying through his spokesman Sa’eb Erekat last week that the “Palestinians” will “never recognize Israel as a Jewish state.”
As Sky News’ Middle East correspondent Dominic Waghorn told his viewers Tuesday:
Unless Netanyahu takes the “bold” step and agrees to extend the freeze, he will “risk incurring the wrath of the Americans.”
It has to be said, even at the risk of digressing from the main players for a moment, that like virtually every single foreign correspondent in Israel, Waghorn is proudly prejudiced in favor of the “Palestinians.” His reports caringly explain why the PLO cannot comply with Israel’s demands on the Jewish state question, while justifying the Arab demands on the settlement freeze because, of course, they “can’t be seen to be talking to people who are building on lands they want for their state.”
Which leads me to the opening of my follow-on article, in which I will explain why, after following the peace process from my home in Jerusalem for more than 20 years, including the recently unfolding efforts to renew this process, I have come to the place where I can no longer ignore this unpalatable truth:
That Israel IS to blame for the failure of the land-for-peace process.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Wednesday, September 8, 2010


Our awesome God...the One who created all things, the One who is in complete control, the One who never slumbers or sleeps, and the One who has numbered the hairs of our head will never allow Israel to cease from being a nation, nor will He ever turn away from His people.

Israel is the apple of God's eye (Zech, 2:8). God will protect, deliver and rescue Israel (Is. 31:5). In Jerusalem, which He has chosen, His name will be there forever (2 Chr. 33:7).

Jeremiah 31:35-36 NIV
This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar - the LORD Almighty is his name: "Only if these decrees vanish from my sight," declares the LORD, "will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me."

Just as Almighty God cares for Israel, He also cares for you and me - for we are all precious in His sight. Just imagine! He holds the whole world in the palm of His hand, yet He will curl up inside our heart if we let Him into our life.

Psalm 91:4 NIV
He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

We must praise God and thank Him every day for His goodness, for abundantly providing for our needs, and for keeping us safe in all circumstances. Above all, we must humbly thank God for His matchless gift of salvation through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross and resurrection – a free gift offered to all who choose to reach out by faith alone to receive it.

Even though each new day will often bring new troubles, disappointment, sadness, and discouragement into our lives, it should also be a time to lean on Him as never before. Then, when the storm clouds gather around us, we know we can depend on the Lord for the renewed strength, hope, and assurance He has promised - for He is faithful to protect, provide, and care for His own.

When we rise up each morning, a spirit of praise and thanksgiving should be in our hearts and on our lips. We need to pray, “Thank you, Lord, for this day You have made. Thank You for allowing me to be a part of it. Help me to rejoice and be glad in it. Show me what You would have me do today that I might do it all for Your honor and glory in Jesus’ Name – Amen!”

Lamentations 3:22 NASB
The LORD'S lovingkindnesses indeed never cease,
For His compassions never fail.
They are new every morning;
Great is Your faithfulness.


Great is His faithfulness. What an awesome God we serve!

May God bless you and keep you in His care!

Rosh HaShanah-Shanah Tovah Umetukah

Rosh HaShanah begins tonight at sundown in Israel. It is the beginning of their calendar year 5771. Today is the first day of the seventh month of Tishri. In Leviticus 23:24, God says the first day shall be a Shabbat or Sabbath ushered in with the blowing of trumpets or shofars. Yom Teruah (Day of Blowing). Many Israelis will be blessing each other with the greeting, Shanah Tovah Umetukah- A Good and Sweet Year. It is also the first day of the 10 Days of Awe in which many Jews will examine their hearts and ask for forgiveness for any wrong doings they've committed during the past year in preparation for Yom Kippur.
Shanah Tovah Umetukah...May the Lord Bless Israel this coming year with prosperity and peace!

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Monday, September 6, 2010

Middle East peace talks: Where they stand

As the Obama administration relaunches direct Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, the BBC's Paul Reynolds outlines where the three parties stand on the core issues of the conflict.


The Israeli government is unwilling to divide Jerusalem, held to be the political and religious centre of the Jewish people. It stands by the 1980 basic Israeli law that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel". In the past there has been room for manoeuvre on the margins. In talks in 2000 and 2007, the then Israeli governments proposed exchanging some outlying annexed districts.

The Palestinians want East Jerusalem, which was controlled by Jordan before being captured by the Israelis in 1967, as the capital of a Palestinian state. The Old City contains the third holiest place in Islam, the al-Aqsa mosque, and the Dome of the Rock, from where Mohammed is said to have visited heaven on his winged steed Burak.

United States
The US does not recognise the Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem and maintains its embassy in Tel Aviv. President Barack Obama has opposed the building of housing for Israelis in East Jerusalem though he said before becoming president that dividing the city would be "very difficult to execute".


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepts that there should be a Palestinian state and that there will have to be an Israeli withdrawal from parts at least of the West Bank (captured by Israel in 1967) to accommodate this. Israel has already withdrawn from Gaza. Israel would like the borders to include Jerusalem and the major Israeli settlements that have grown up on the West Bank.

They want the talks to start from the basic position that all the land occupied by Israel in 1967 belongs to a future Palestine. Any land given to the Israelis would have to be compensated for by a balanced land swap.

United States
The US agrees that the starting point but not the end point should be the 1967 lines and that a land swap will have to be the basis of any agreement. It will encourage this.


The Israeli government insists on keeping the major Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Any departure from this would break up the coalition which forms the government. An immediate problem is that an Israeli moratorium on West Bank settlements is due to run out on 26 September.

Ideally, the Palestinians would like all settlements to be abandoned as they were in Gaza. However, they appear to accept that some will have to stay but they will argue for a minimum number and a land swap for any that are left. They threaten to leave the talks if the Israeli moratorium is ended on 26 September.

United States
As with the annexation of East Jerusalem, the US has not recognised the international legitimacy of the Israeli West Bank settlements. But it accepts their reality and will press for compromise. It is also trying to reach a compromise on the moratorium problem.


Israel rejects the idea that Palestinian refugees from previous wars should be allowed any "right of return" to their former homes. They say that this is a device to destroy the state of Israel by demography in order to re-establish a unitary state of Palestine. For that reason Mr Netanyahu has called for Israel to be recognised as a Jewish state.

Formally, they maintain the "right of return", arguing that without it a great injustice would not be put right. However, there has been regular talk among Palestinians that this "right" could be met by compensation. They refuse to recognise the concept of Israel as a "Jewish state", saying that this is unnecessary and that it ignores the Israeli-Arab citizens of Israel.

United States
The US understands the Israeli refusal to take back refugees and hopes that this can be resolved by compensation and development aid for this whose cannot go back to their previous family homes.

Link to article here

I certainly don't know if the above information is accurate or up-to-date. It apparently was written a few days prior to the Washington DC meeting with Obama, but more than likely has not changed in any significant way.


"Occupation" Truth-- What the Media doesn't tell you...

Occupation by Ted Belman
Israel is accused of occupying the West Bank and formerly, Gaza, and  these territories are described as “the occupied Palestinian territories.” Not only are they not occupied in a legal sense, they are not “Palestinian” lands in a sovereign sense..
The Fourth Geneva Convention (FGC) is a treaty between signatory states that are called High Contracting Parties (HCP). It regulates the obligations of one HCP who occupies the land of another HCP. It defines the terms “Occupying Power” and “Occupied State” only. Thus this convention does not apply to the territories because they were not the land of any HCP. They have never been the land of an HCP.
Prior to 1967, Jordon was in control of these territories, just as Israel is currently in control. Jordanian sovereignty over these lands was never recognized and ultimately Jordan relinquished any claims over these lands. The FGC was never applied when Jordan ruled the land and it shouldn’t be applied now that Israel does.
Yet the International Court of Justice, when it gave an advisory opinion on the Israeli security fence, “identified Jordan as the occupied power of the West Bank”. According to David Matas, an international lawyer of considerable repute, in his well argued book Aftershock http://www.amazon.com/Aftershock-David-Matas/dp/1550025538:
"The judgment moves on from this legal reasoning to labeling the West Bank as Palestinian occupied territory. But this labelling is based on the ethnic composition of the West Bank, not on its legal status...This assertion by the ICJ that the West Bank is occupied territory is a contortion the Court imposed on the law to get to its desired results of slapping the label “occupier” on Israel..shows that the primary concern of the court was to connect to pro-Palestinian rhetoric. As a result the Palestinians consider themselves the 'occupied power'”.
Matas notes “That the Geneva Conventions on the Laws of War do not recognize the legal possibility of the occupation of a people, only the occupation of the territory of a state.” A Protocol to these conventions does recognize such a possibility but Israel is not a signatory to it.
It must be clearly understood that Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is not illegal and the UN has never claimed it to be. In fact Resolution 242 permits Israel to remain until an agreement on “secure and recognized borders”.
The Palestinians have no greater claim to a state than any minority group in any other state that wants a state of their own. The Basques and the Kurds come to mind. Despite their ethnic culture, majority populations in the areas they claim and rebellions, no one is demanding that they be given statehood.
Matas also takes issue with Dore Gold and others for calling the land “disputed land”, because others argue that all of Israel is disputed land.
Israel has accepted the PA as the negotiating party. Nevertheless Israel knows the PA is currently an illegitimate government, having overstayed its mandate, and speaks for no one, much less Hamas.
The anti-Zionists argue the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria are illegal and rely solely on the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention (FGC) which provides that an occupying power is prohibited from transferring civilian populations to occupied territories. They say that the prohibition against transfer includes a prohibition against encouragement to settle. The matter has never been put to a court for interpretation or determination. But the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) explains “that this provision was intended to prevent a practice adopted during the Second World War in which certain powers transferred portions of their populations to occupied territories for political and racial reasons or in order, as they claimed to colonize those territories.”
Nazi Germany enforced two kinds of transfers but in both cases they were forced transfers. The victims were the persons being forced, not the people already there.
The anti-Zionists reject the notion that the proscription is against only forced transfers and argue that the FGC proscribes inducement to move as well. But how can there be a crime of inducement when the person committing the act and moving to the area, has done nothing wrong. How can you be guilty of a crime by inducing someone to do something which is not a crime?
Furthermore, this inducement is said to be be a War Crime on an equal footing with Genocide. The equation is ludicrous. And if the people relocate on their own volition and not due to inducements, what then? What
individuals would be held responsible?
Even if someone in Israel was convicted of offering inducements to relocate, the people themselves would not be affected and could remain in the communities they created if they wished.
Matas opines, “The interpretation defies the ordinary understanding of criminal responsibility where the person committing the act is the primary wrongdoer and the person inducing the act is only an accessory.”
Matas concludes. “There is all the difference in the world between forcible transfer, the offense of the Geneva Convention, and voluntary settlement, even where the settlement is encouraged (by providing inducements). Transfer is something that is done to people. Settlement is something people do.”
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court made it an offense to ”directly or indirectly” transfer populations. The ICRC has attempted to interpret “indirect transfers” as “inducements” thereby making them a crime. But the GC certainly does not do that and that currently is the prevailing opinion.
This did not prevent the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in its advisory opinion noted above, from finding that the 'settlements' violated international law. No reasons were given and no authority cited. But elsewhere it
expressed the opinion that the combination of the settlements and the fence amounted to de facto annexation. It ignored Israel argument that the fence was not intended to be the border but was merely a security measure. While actual annexation may be a violation of the FGC, the communities and the fence certainly were not.an annexation or a violation of the FGC. After all, what about the 'settlements' left 'outside' on the west side of the fence? Are they an annexation too?
The ICJ did not conclude that someone in Israel was guilty of inducing 'settlements' or in any other way of transferring populations.
Matas expands on his dim view of the advisory opinion. He considers it an attempt to discredit Israel that actually discredited the ICJ. He prays that the ICC will be more judicious. The ICJ, after all, is an organ of the UN who requested it to provide the opinion. Similarly the UN requested Goldstone to investigate Cast Lead and produce a report. This report, like the advisory opinion, was just what the UN "ordered”, but the opinion of the ICJ was just that, an opinion, and is not legally binding on anyone.
The US has traditionally, with the Carter administration being the only exception, refrained from describing the Judea and Samaria Jewish communities as illegal and instead has called them 'obstacles to peace'. In September 2009, Obama went before the United Nations and declared
 “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” This is closer to Carter’s position but falls short of declaring them illegal. Nevertheless, it prompted John Bolton http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=8227&posts=2
to say “This is the most radical anti-Israel speech I can recall any president making.”
All this ignores the fact that the Palestine Mandate encouraged close settlement of the land by Jews. This right has never been rescinded and the UN has no right to rescind it. So Jews from anywhere actually have the right to settle in Judea and Samaria and the PA and UN have no right to say otherwise.
To demand that the future Palestinian state be Judenrein, free of Jews, is reprehensible and discriminatory. The West should not condone it, it would never condone it anywhere else or about anyone else, but it does here.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Sunday, September 5, 2010

There is a Better Way!!!

 By Jan Willem Van der Hoeven
 I          Keep Judea and Samaria. These are disputed areas - not "occupied territories" even though the whole world labels them as such in its insistence that in its self-defensive war Israel took territories that did not belong to her. Jerusalem's official position on this must be changed and then adhered to: Israel liberated its own promised land from illegal occupation by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan; an occupation rejected by the entire international community except for Britain and Pakistan, and which lasted from 1948 to the Six Day War in 1967.

II    Israel should in no way fear a demographic problem arising out of keeping all Samaria and Judea, but face it vigorously with the following measures:
a)      Make bringing Jews home from all over the world a top governmental priority, with an upgraded Ministry of Aliyah fielding the best candidates to explain abroad the need for aliyah.
b)      Stimulate natural population growth by providing financial assistance to large families. Where possible there should be an overall effort to counsel against the evil of abortion, so that the tens of thousands of Jewish children that are being aborted every year will live - to be adopted if need be by Israeli families who would love to have children of their own.

III  End all distinction or difference between those who desire to be loyal citizens of the Jewish State of Israel, imposing on all the same obligations and giving all the same rights. This includes the obligation to serve in the Israel Defense Forces. Such a move may cause a voluntary exodus of many of the Muslim Arabs now living in Israel with Israeli passports, for a great number would in all likelihood refuse to serve in "the Jewish Army" to defend a state which, in their heart of hearts, they wish to see become a Muslim-controlled Palestinian state. Their departure will free Israel from those who would otherwise use their citizenship to undermine the very state they are part of.

IV  As Ambassador Yoram Ettinger and others like Paul Morland, Birkbeek College, University of London, have amply documented, there is in the foreseeable future no, I repeat no, demographic danger for Israel to hold on to all her G-d given land.
See Yoram Ettinger "Freeze of Jewish Construction in Judea and Samaria: Peace or Appeasement Enhancer"  http://www.ourjerusalem.com/opinion/story/freeze-of-jewish-construction-in-judea-and-samaria-peace-or-appeasement-enhancer.html
      Paul Morland "Defusing the demographic scare" http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/defusing-the-demographic-scare-by-paul-morland-1.275657 

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Obama Wrong about Israel's Terrorist Attacks

In response to the murder of four Israelis by Arab terrorists, President Obama said "The tragedy that we saw yesterday where people were gunned down on the street by terrorists who are purposely trying to undermine these talks …"

The aim of the terrorists, however, was not to stop peace talks, since such an assumption is absurd, and the attack occurred close to the same place where an Israeli policeman was shot in his car several months ago when there were no "peace talks."

Israelis are frequently attacked on roads throughout by rocks and fire bombs, sometimes by snipers; these attacks are not connected to any political or diplomatic process. Framing this attack as politically motivated distorts the nature and meaning of Arab terrorism against Jews.

President Obama went on to say, "The message should go out to Hamas and everybody else who is taking credit for these heinous crimes that this is not going to stop us from not only ensuring a secure Israel but also securing a longer-lasting peace in which people throughout the region can take a different course."

One might have expected him to say, "Those who commit such murders, and those who support them, will be brought to justice and punished to the fullest extent of the law."

Or, "These murders are the result of incitement and we will prevent all funding of incitement."

Or, "We demand that the PA forces, especially those trained and supplied forces by the United States, will apprehend, arrest, and punish anyone who engages in terrorism."

Or, "Unless the PA acts to eliminate terrorism and incitement there can be no progress in political, diplomatic or military cooperation. Actions speak louder than words."

But he did not, and he won't, because no matter what Arab terrorists do, the PA knows it has the support of America, Europe and the international community. It can get away with murder, and does.

President Obama's misunderstanding of and his failure to act against Arab terrorism is due to the mindset that views terrorism as a response to specific causes - and political or ideological motives. In Israel's case, it's "the occupation," which has become a brand-name legitimization for killing Jews and demonizing Israel.
The danger of linking terrorism to grievances is that it rationalizes murder and justifies those who perpetrate it. But those who carry out such acts are not driven by a sense of injustice, or rescuing humanity; they are homicidal criminals who seek to inflict the most damage to the largest number of people, regardless of who they are, or their beliefs.

Arab terrorists, who plan and train meticulously, don't seek political compromises; their goal is Jihad, total elimination of Jews, and the State of Israel. They don't think about a "peace process;" they are committed to annihilation of their enemies. They see themselves as "martyrs," and are glorified by their communities, and by the PA.

And they see their cause as just. This provides the psychological determination to perpetrate murder as an act of religious and political sanctification. And they are not alone, since most of the international community, and President Obama now, justify not their means, but the end – a second Arab Palestinian state, for starters; an Islamic world for "the believers."

This is what President Obama did not understand about the controversial Islamic Center near the site of "9/11." It's not about a mosque, but about what comes along with it. It's not about a building, or religious freedom; it's about full disclosure and transparency.

It's not what Obama said, but what he could have and should have said – and done – as an American president. The American flag in his lapel is not just an ornament.

By Moshe Dann The author is a writer and journalist living in Israel

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Confirmed Oil in Central Israel-Ezekiel 38

The Givat Olam umbrella organization confirmed for investors in Jerusalem on Monday the discovery of a large commercially-viable oil field in central Israel.

Hundreds of investors from around the world, many of them Christian Zionists, have been pouring money into Givat Olam for years in the hopes of helping secure Israel's energy independence.

"For many years we drilled wells without success," chief geologist Tuvia Luskin told the investors. But the Meged 5 exploratory well near the central Israel town of Rosh Ha'ayin had finally provided results which Luskin compared to "the giving of the Torah."

Luskin and his team first struck oil at Meged 5 in early July. They conducted 189 hours of production tests, during which 3,015 barrels of oil were produced. According to Luskin, when it reaches its capacity, Meged 5 will likely be able to produce 450 barrels of oil a day.

A final report on the size of the oil field is expected next month.

Israeli officials have hailed the find as a major breakthrough that could drastically alter Israel's fortunes, both by reducing dependence on foreign energy sources and by providing an enormous boost to the economy.

This link provides more information on another oil find and the Biblical implications! OIL
Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua


Blog Widget by LinkWithin